Re: [Pan-users] UIP where?

[Bob]

On Tue, 20 Nov 2012 17:11:31 +0000, Duncan wrote:

> Bob posted on Tue, 20 Nov 2012 02:28:11 +0000 as excerpted:
> 
>> On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 22:31:54 +0000, Beartooth wrote:
>> 
>>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 20:53:27 +0000, Duncan wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Beartooth posted on Sun, 18 Nov 2012 19:53:46 +0000 as excerpted:
>>>> 
>>>>> The Usenet Improvement Project offers a filter for Pan
>>>>> 
>>>>> [*]
>>>>> Score:: =-9999 Message-ID: googlegroups Message-ID: webtv
>>>>> 
>>>>> but it doesn't say where to put it. I don't see a canonical-looking
>>>>> place it go??
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> That would go in the scorefile itself (text-edit added, not via the
>>>> pan UI).
>>>> 
>>>> The [] lines indicate the newsgroup (*-wildcard in this case) and
>>>> start a section.  The Score: lines start an individual score, and the
>>>> Message-ID:
>>>> lines are conditions for applying that score.  (Without looking it up
>>>> to be sure, I believe Score: single-colon indicates AND, ALL
>>>> conditions would need to match to trigger, Score:: double-colon
>>>> indicates OR, ANY matched condition triggers.)
>>> 
>>>     OK, let's see if I've got it. I went to .pan2, and opened it with
>>> gedit.
>>> 
>>>     It was full of short passages with blank lines between, each with
>>> "%BOS" and "%EOS" at start & finish. Each also had a line saying it
>>> had been made by Pan.
>> 
>> The %BOS stands for Beginning of Score and the %EOS stands for End of
>> score.  There must be a blank line between the final %EOS and the new
>> %BOS
> 
> This is incorrect.  See below.
> 
>>>     I skipped a line, then inserted what the UIP had given me,
>>> verbatim (without the BOS/EOS, being as how I'm not Pan). Is that
>>> right?
>> 
>> No. It must be entered just like the other scores in the score file.
> 
> This is incorrect (and Bear is correct).  In the score-file format,
> lines beginning with % are comment lines (so % in pan's score-file
> format is very similar to the # in traditional *rc and other config
> files, as well as in shell scripts).
> 
> Pan simply includes them when you use the GUI to create a score, in an
> attempt to make things clearer for those hand-editing the file. 
> However,
> the lines can be entirely deleted if desired and it won't affect how pan
> interprets the scores at all.
> 
> Of course you may add your own comment lines as well, or conveniently
> use % to "comment-out" a line if you're testing and not yet sure whether
> you wish to actually delete the line or not, just as people do with # in
> shell-scripts and traditional Unix style config files.
> 
> Because these lines are simply comments, and blank lines are effectively
> ignored as well, the above claim that there must be a blank line between
> a preceding %EOS and the next %BOS lines is incorrect as well.
> 
> 
> I've posted these links many times over the years, but it's worth
> reposting them once again.  Pan's Scorefile format is adopted from
> slrn's format, with two differences: (1) pan doesn't have a couple of
> the advanced features (include files for sure, also the has-body
> conditional,
> I think), and (2) pan's scoring is case-insensitive, scoring on "pan" or
> "PAN" or "Pan" or "pAN" or.... shouldn't matter.
> 
> http://www.slrn.org/docs/score.txt
> 
> For those willing to do it, editing the scorefile directly makes sense
> as it's possible to "optimize" pan's scoring, eliminating excess
> comments, consolidating many added-by-GUI scores into one and combining
> multiple scores into single score sections (delimited by [newsgroup]
> entries, see the documentation link), etc.  After one gets used to doing
> so, pan's GUI method of editing seems baroque and inefficient indeed,
> tho it's a convenient way to get a new entry started, after which the
> user can open the scorefile directly, editing the "start" created by the
> GUI, possibly removing/adding/changing comments, and placing it at the
> appropriate location in the file to optimize sections, etc.
> 
> Here, I keep my permanent entries nicely edited and optimized, but
> rather more lightly edit temporary/expiring scores, keeping them
> separate from the optimized "permanent" scores.  Only the
> temporary/expiring scores have a comment (similar to pan's %BOS lines)
> with the date added (since the expires line documents when it expires,
> but only a comment documents when it was added), but I normally delete
> the %EOS comments entirely, as extraneous noise.
> 
> 
> Meanwhile, just as pan did, the (AFAIK MSWormOS based) xnews also
> borrowed the slrn sorefile format, but they have a few other changes as
> well.  So for people just getting into manually editing this file, I'd
> suggest avoiding their documentation in ordered to avoid confusion, but
> for those interested in studying another implementation and where they
> chose to implement differences, the xnews scorefile document can be
> quite interesting as well.
> 
> http://xnews.remarqs.net/scoring.txt
> 
> 
>>>     When I told gedit to save, it renamed the file to Score~; I
>>> changed that to plain "Score" and the original to "ScoreOLD"
>> 
>> That way you haven't done anything.  The Score~ file is the backup,
>> ScoreOLD is the file you saved and should be Score or score(however the
>> original file was or was not capitalized.
> 
> When I read Bear's post, I interpreted the above as him doing it
> correctly.  After reading your reply, I'm confused enough by the wording
> in both to be unsure.  Yes, the Score~ file is an automatically created
> (by gedit) backup.  Ordinarily, it would work this way: The original
> file would be renamed to Score~, while the edited and saved version
> would keep the original Score name.  There would be no need to create a
> manual backup called ScoreOLD unless an "extra" manual backup was
> actually desired, to be /doubly/ sure, or whatever.  But the wording of
> Bear's post and your reply are confusing enough I'm not sure which one
> got renamed to Score, and where ScoreOLD came in, and...
> 
> The way to be sure would be to open the Score file again, and see if it
> has the desired changes.  If it does, everything should be fine.  If it
> doesn't, then they can either be manually added once again, or whatever
> backup has the desired changes can be renamed or copied to Score, so pan
> sees and uses it.
> 
> 
>>>     So have I Eternalized September, Lo! these many moons later?
> 
> The irony is indeed recognized, yes. =:^)

Sorry about that, I have never seen the file you listed, and was just 
going by what was in the score file.  My pardon.

will read the file and see what it relates.

Bob